藝人專屬經紀契約下經紀人權利義務之研究

A Study on Artist Managers' Contractual Rights and Obligations Pursuant to Exclusive Management Agreements

陳書郁(Shu-Yu Chen)

指導教授 ： 謝銘洋

國立臺灣大學/法律學院/法律學研究所/碩士(2012年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2012.01476

摘要

鑑於我國演藝經紀業缺乏行政管制，現行藝人之專屬經紀契約咸仰賴私法自治，形成契約規範。然而，過度放任契約自治並未促成良性的產業競爭；不肖經紀人往往利用其強大之談判籌碼訂定顯然不利於藝人之契約條款，契約期限過長、高比例之佣金等之爭議，時有所聞。鑑於行政管制之介入尚在未定之天，本文欲從司法之觀點，透過法律原理之推導與民法第 247-1 條之適用，釐清經紀人契約權利之合理界限，並透過法理基礎及演藝經紀習慣，探明經紀人之契約義務、違反義務之行為態樣及相關法律效果，以臻明確。

在經紀人之契約權利方面，我國現行實務多以當事人契約自治，解決雙方爭議；然而貫徹私法自治，有時產生經紀人權利義務失衡之情事。實則，法院宜妥適運用民法第 247-1 條及其他法理基礎，適切調整雙方之權利義務流動狀態。在經紀人之契約義務上，透過演藝經紀習慣，澄明寬泛模糊之契約文義並予以類型化；同時，亦透過契約定性及誠信原則之實踐，適度填補專屬經紀契約中當事人漏未約定之契約漏洞，如利益衝突之防免、保密義務。關於經紀人違約之認定，因演藝經紀受整體演藝環境、藝人表現與經紀人對於藝人商品之專業操作等各種因素影響，在規劃演藝事業、洽詢表演工作、培訓、包裝行銷藝人或管理藝人權利(著作權、姓名肖像權)上具一定投資、射倖性，在違反上開契約義務之認定上，宜參照交易習慣，非可概以結果成敗論斷。

關於經紀人違反契約義務之法律效果，藝人僅於藝人與經紀人雙方信賴關係動搖致影響契約存續時，終止契約，否則僅得請求經紀人補正。因專屬經紀契約為繼續性契約，僅於經紀人違反契約悖於契約締結目的時，如違反利益衝突防免義務，肯認藝人亦得解除契約。前開終止與解約之規定，無礙於藝人之損害賠償請求權。至於損害賠償，在藝人主張遭冷凍時多難以成立，蓋演藝經紀本有其風險，即使
藝人克服舉證上之困難，競爭機會之喪失亦非法律所肯認之所失利益。解決之道宜於契約中約定違約金約款。至若經紀人雙重抽佣或收取回扣等違反利害衝突之情事，藝人得請求經紀人返還處理事務所收受之利益，或拒絕給付居間報酬及媒合締約機會之支出。

基於司法被動性，司法介入調整、規制民事契約有其界限，吾人仍應加強推動行政立法管制，減少不良經紀業者之剝削，使經紀人與藝人之利益流動趨於合理，方為促進演藝經紀業健全蓬勃發展的根本之道。

關鍵字

藝人 ； 經紀人 ； 專屬經紀契約 ； 委任 ； 利益衝突

並列摘要

In light of the lack of administrative regulations for artists-management industry, the contents of artists' exclusive management agreements are dominated by the principle of freedom of contract. The practice of the principle, however, sometimes hinders positive development. Notorious artist managers commit terms and conditions of
contracts which are disadvantageous for artists by exploiting their strong bargaining power. The common issues are excessively long contract periods and the high ratio of
commission. In reaction to the uncertainty of government intervention in the industry, I will discuss these issues from the judicial perspective in the thesis.

In common cases, the exclusive management agreements are legally binding for both artists and managers subject to freedom of contract. While the contractual relations
are unilateral beneficial to artist managers, the contractual rights should be adjusted or the terms of conditions of the agreements are supposed to be announced invalid via Art. 247-1 of Civil Code. On the other hand, the legal languages of written contractual obligations for artist managers are somewhat ambiguous. Through interpretation of contract context, legal principles and the reference of entertainment practice, the written and unwritten duties the artist managers undertake will be clarified. Eventually, the loopholes in the agreement will be eliminated, such as the conflict of interest and
the confidentiality. Since talents are business, whether artist managers breach the contracts should refer to entertainment management practice.

When it comes to the effects of breach by artist managers, artists are able to terminate the agreement only when the reliance relationships collapse. Otherwise talents are
only entitled to cure the managers' performance. Only if artist managers breach the contract which collides with the purpose of contract, talents have right to rescission.
Also, artists are entitled to recover the damages caused by managers' nonperformance, even the agreements are terminated or rescinded. Concerned about the benefits which managers acquire in violation of conflict of interest, artists are entitled to recover the benefits as well.

As a matter of fact, adjusting civil agreements via judicial activities is a worse solution to these contractual problems because of judicial restraint. To facilitate the sound development in entertainment management industry, legislation or administrative regulations are indeed the fundemantal and prodominent measures.

並列關鍵字

artists ； talents ； artist managers ； exclusive management agreement ； mandate ； conflict of interests

參考文獻

陳曉慧、呂佩芳(2008)。《數位內容之授權與交易機制》，初版。台北：經濟部智慧財產局。

詹森林(2009)。《競業禁止與保密條款契約實務》，三版。臺北市: 經濟部智慧財產局。

黃三榮(1997)，<營業秘密法逐條評釋>，《律師雜誌》，第211 期，52-63。

行政院消費者保護委員會(編)(1998)。《消費者保護法判決函釋彙編(一)》，初版。台北，行政院消費者保護委員會。

黃松茂(2008)。《人格權之財產性質—以人格特徵之商業利用為中心》，國立台灣大學法律學研究所碩士論文(未出版)，台北市。